National Republican., 1887-02-15
STEEL FOR HEAVY GUNS.
The Only Metal ServIceable for Heavy
Armament.

OF the United states Naval lnsttute," No'
40, is the most interesting and valuable OF
all this series Of papers. 1t contains a full
report Of the discussion on the subject OF
steel for heavy guns which was prompted
by the paper read on the 9Th Of January by
Mr.. Dorsey. His argument, In brief, was
was that mild steel should be substituted
for the hard steel, or steel OF high tensile
strength, which has been settled upon by
our ordnance authorities as the proper
material for guns. The discussion which
followed the reading showed that large
majority Of the experts called together to
listen to Mr.. Dorsey were In substantial
agreement with his general conclusion.
Indeed, many Of them presented the argu.
ment for soft steel much more forcibly than
he did. and with more thorough knowl-
edge OF the special necessities Of ordnance
construction. OF thirty.two persons taxi
ing part In the discussion only nine were
prepared to sustain without reserve the
ordnance position. OF these nine two were
Lieutenant Commander Barber and Lieut..
Jaques; two others, Messrs. Joseph Nor
Cambria Works; another, Mr.. X. w.
Davenport, the Midvale Steel Company,
and a sixth, Mr.. Isaac G. johnson, the
Crucible Steel Works Of Spuyten Duyvil,
New York; the other three were Lieuts. r.
II. Ingersoll and Austin N. Knight, U. s.
N.i anu CapJ. Rogers Dlrnle, Jr., OF tne
army ordnance department.
Against these men were arrayed, on lines
OF greater or less divergence, to army Off.
GERS: Col. George II. Elliot, engineer corps,
u. 5. A., who sent some notes on the
working stress Of iron aud steel by Mr.
Benz. Baker, Of the Firth Bridge railroad,
as tending to confirm Mr.. Dorsey's con.
clusions, and Capt. o. Il. Michaelis, o. D.,
U. s A.; two gun inventors, DR.. Gatling
and Mr.. Hiram s. Maxim; five manufac-
turers, Messrs. Vim. Henry Brown, 8. T.
Wellman, Of the Otis Steel Works; Robt.
w. Hunt, Troy Steel and Iron Company; 7.
+. Rowland, Continental Iron Works, and
VIM. Metcalf, Crescent Steel Works;
twelve civil engineers, chemists, and
professors-Messr Thomas G.. Clark,
Francis Collinqwood, G.. G. Schneider,
James Christie, Charles B. Dudley, Thos.
N. Ely, and Theodore Cooper, Profs. r. II.
Thurston, Cornell University; Thomas
Egleston, Columbia College; Charles Il.
Greene, University OF Michigan; Raphael
w. s. Rosecrans added his testimony, writ
ing that his investigation of high grade
steel guns and other structures as chairman
OF the committee on military affairs. was
thoroughly confrmatory Of the views taken
by Mr.. Dorsey in his paper.
1t is not strange that, with this array
againsth him, Lieut.. Jaques should have been
betrayed into the admission that he was op-
posed to the consideration OF Mr.. Dorsey's
paper. 1t is fortunate that the officers OF
The naval institute took broader view OF
the question, for even Lieut.. Jacques in
the end admitted that an interesting and
spirited discussion had resulted in giving
ian opportunity for the presentation Of the
opinions OF men pre-eminent In their ro-
epective professions.n 1t is obvious from
this discussion that men who have given
the subject disinterested consideration do
not by any means accept the position main
tanned by interested advocates who would
like to have 1t understood that the
question is closed beyond debate. Prof.
Egleston said: "We shall have to do for
steel what Gen. Rodman did for cast iron.'
Mr.. Wellman, Of the Otis Steel Co., saw
''no reason why as good, If not q better,
gun cannot be made by some modification
of the Rodman, process applied to a steel
cast gun.' Mr.. Maxim contended that
guns burst "because they were cooled from
the outside instead Of from the inside"
and that "tempering from the outside was
worse than no tempering at ALL" Mr.
Hunt, Of the Troy Steel and Iron Co., said
Why should the authorities SC 'pSsistently
ssnsf The inyessation would cost but S'i itte Hsae
and am, sustained by the opinion OF many
able steel workers in believing that In that
and best guns. There are American works
ready now TO make the trial, and II successful,
the requirements OF the country country ca, can
Ss ranSy anSons met risk sRd some Mh0ui mons asa
of dollars in the construction and capitalizs-
tion Of plsnt which may prove a failure.
guns, and the government has at South Boston
tools now ready to finish them. Fifty thou
sand dollars would afford an ample fund.
Capt Michaelis said: ''The most recent
Investigations have shown that In order to
obtain the greatest chemical homogeneity,
the very soul Of modern structural steel, In
hollow or annular forms, the largest possi-
BILE cores should be used, and the mass
cooled from within-a condition fully met
by the Rodman process" Mr.. Cooper
said: "Personally, do not believe we have
even yet exhausted the possibilities Of our
cast iron; and am not yet OF the opinion
that, with good opportunity to develop
the proper method OF casting steel guns, an
equally excellent result cannot be made
with this metal that formerly we were able
to do with our cast iron."
These quotations, as well as the general
drift Of the discussion, was In substantial
agreement with the opinions maintained In
the Journal, and In the event Of Congress
furnishing them with funds 1t will be mex
cusable neglect on the part of our ordnance
officers II they fail to put the question Of
casting guns to thorough and impartial
test. 1t is but fair to insist at the same
time that the officers Of our navy who have
manufacturers should be absolutely ex-
cluded from participation in the decision as
to the proper material for American guns.
An open-minded consideration Of this sub.
ject will, in our deliberate Judgment, lead
to results that will make us absolutely inde.
once more in the lead in ordnance construc.
ton. The experiments of Lieut.. Zalinski
in the use Of electricity In casting promise
remarkable results. We have been familiar
with them from the first, but had not felt
at liberty to speak Of them until their author
did so. An increase OF nearly 100 per cent.
in the tensile strength Of cast iron is gain
not to be despised, and 1t suggests posi-
bilities in the manufacture Of cheap guns
the Importance Of which can readily be un-
derstood.
The argument in favor Of steel for heavy
guns, as against cast iron, Is very, ably pre-
sented In this number of the Journal by
Commander G. w. Sumner, United States
navy. So far as his argument may be con-
sidered as addressed to those who favor
the use OF cast iron, to the exclusion Of
steel, the audience is small one; indeed It
would be difficult for any one to sustain
such position. The very fact that steel
possesses an inherent strength and elastic
limit superior to cast or wrought iron was
argument sufficient years ago for its at.
tempted use, while the fact that that effort
In Europe has, been largely crowned by
success Is argument beyond controversy
why an effort should be made In this coun-
try, not only for the production OF a more
reliable steel than that produced abroad,
but for the development Of our steel in
dustries to such point as shall secure fill
ing at satisfactory rate the wants OF the
government for naval and military pur-
poses, however pressing they may be. The
popular idea of steel is q metal of remark
able strength, toughness, aud elasticity,
and the great difficulty OF preserving
these qualities In gun masses is little re-
allied OF cast iron 1t is perhaps safe to
say that its true qualities and possibilities